In the “Manhattan Declaration” created by a group of Christians to get people to oppose same-sex marriage is by far a very controversial document that some people do and do not agree with. The authors in the textbook would have mixed feelings about this declaration. The Vatican would very much agree with the Manhattan Declaration mainly because they would agree solely because it is Christians and Catholics creating the declaration. Also, the Vatican says sexual relations means nothing unless it is between a married man and woman just like what is written in the Declaration. Corvino, on the other hand, would disagree with this declaration. This is mainly due to how Corvino believes there is no evidence to why people should oppose homosexuals getting married even though this Declaration attempts to create false reasons. The declaration actually does exactly what Corvino says is the reason people oppose same-sex marriage, it being unnatural and harmful. Corvino proves both to be false, thereby, proving the exact argument in the Declaration false. Mappes would probably just frown upon this Declaration since the Declaration puts traditional marriage on such a high pedestal, while Mappes has marriage at the same moral level as everything else. Mappes mainly talks about how it is wrong to use people for sex, or use people in general, and the Declaration did not really mention anything about using people. Therefore, Mappes would not be as upset of this like Corvino may be. Halwani may agree with the Declaration in the sense that both agree that sex is driven by love, and when people do not act on love it is morally wrong, although Halwani does not really mention same-sex marriage to the extent of the Declaration or Corvino’s essay. Gallagher would absolutely agree with the Declaration by saying marriage is for the sole purpose of procreation which is exactly what the Declaration is saying by only wanting a man and woman to be married in order to procreate. Also, both Gallagher and the Declaration put traditional marriage as something to be achieved and something for people to reach for. Wolfson, on the other hand, would feel this Declaration is an injustice to homosexuals. For one, he does not believe marriage is solely for procreation which is one point against the Declaration. The Declaration tries to say how same-sex marriage would be harmful for families, but Wolfson strikes that down in his essay.
I, for one, find this declaration completely hypocritical to the Christian faith. The first thing that is stated is,” reaching out with compassion to the poor, oppressed and suffering.” These group of “Christians” want to help the oppressed, yet they are oppressing homosexuals from getting married, that makes no sense. It really bothered me that this declaration treats homosexuals like they are not even humans, almost like they are not as good as them. Then try and say God agrees with that idea. Being Christian myself, it is obvious to any Christian that God loves everyone. Everyone means everyone, and that does not discriminate just because two people like the same-sex. I do not appreciate this group of “Christians” acting as if God discriminates and does not love everyone when that is the furthest thing from what Christianity is. It seems like they are trying to twist words from the Bible around in order to advance their own personal agenda even if it is not true. If these people were really Christian, then they would love everyone and not want to discriminate against someone, even same-sex couples. This declaration gives Christians and Catholics a bad name, in my opinion.